vi. other parties directly relevant for the country under construction."57
Bearing in mind the emphasis on the civil society role in a given country's post-conflict phase in the report of the High-level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change, it seems reasonable to assume a broad interpretation of the formulation
"other parties directly relevant for the country under construction". Thus the participation of NGOs active in, or with specialist knowledge of, a post-conflict country on the agenda of the Peacebuilding Commission, is in principle possible.
5 Conclusions and Recommendations
1. The effectively high level of informal support for UN work from NGOs and their growing importance as actors in international politics are in inverse proportion to their formal legal standing within the United Nations system. For this reason, reform of the participatory rights of NGOs in the United Nations is necessary.
2. It is expected that the Heads of State and Government will initiate meaningful institutional reform of the United Nations at the Millenium +5 Summit (M +5 Summit) in September 2005. During the preparation process for the Summit, it became clear that most UN Member States attending the M +5 Summit do not aspire to reform of the participatory opportunities and rights available to civil society organisations, as proposed for example by the Cardoso Report. The participation of NGOs in the newly created or reformed UN bodies such as the Peacebuilding Commission or the Human Rights Council will only be negotiated in the follow-up process of the M +5 Summit. It is therefore absolutely necessary to involve NGOs in this follow-up to the M +5 Summit.
3. There is no single concept to describe and define the difference between non-state actors within the United Nations. Associated with this is also a lack of clarity
56 Cf. Footnote 36, Sections 91 and 131.
57 Cf. Footnote 46, Section 60.
regarding the different roles and functions of non-state organisations in the UN system - for example the differences between the aims and responsibilities of civil society and the private sector. The individual actors of international politics – NGOs, private sector and the UN Member States – should have a fundamental discussion on the roles and functions of non-state organisations in the UN system, firstly between themselves (for example at the UN General Assembly, a global NGO forum and a meeting of the private sector) and then in a further step with each other. Finally they must aim to create a definition of individual actors which is relevant to the UN system.
4. On the one hand, a definition of NGOs must emphasise the concept of orientation towards the common good in the work of NGOs. On the other, it must be complex enough to include all the different functions of NGOs: interest groups representation, agenda setting, expertise, operational functions and watchdog. An understanding of NGO functions in the UN system is important in order to grasp their different roles and identify opportunities for participation. Above all, UN Member States should not, as has hitherto been the case, "fear" the watchdog function of NGOs in monitoring and reviewing implementation of, or compliance with, political decisions, but rather recognise this function in the cause of greater legitimisation of international politics.
5. The members of the intergovernmentally organised United Nations are sovereign states whose membership and therefore participation in the UN system is based on the political legitimacy of their governments. NGOs, on the other hand, lack a clearly defined and uniform foundation of legitimacy, a constituent component of
participation in the UN system. In their watchdog function, NGOs monitor the behaviour of Member States at a national and international level. NGOs, on the other hand, are not as a rule subject to third party monitoring, other than possibly by their own members. Strong NGO participation in the UN system assumes that NGOs act in a transparent and controlled manner. To address this, the Cardoso Panel has proposed the development of a Code of Conduct for civil society actors. However, this should come from the NGOs themselves and not be created by the UN secretariat, and then agreed by the UN secretariat in a second step as envisaged by the Cardoso Panel. The basis for the Code of Conduct could be the Code of Conduct developed by CONGO.58 6. NGO access to the United Nations is complicated by the considerable divergence in the accreditation process, admission criteria and forms of participation among the different UN bodies and special organisations. The Cardoso Panel has therefore proposed standardising the accreditation procedure and placing it under the remit of a committee of the General Assembly rather than ECOSOC, as is currently the case.
Voting decisions of the General Assembly committee would follow a selection process carried out by an independent accreditation office, which would itself be supported by an expert advisory council. The foundation for the standardisation would be an inventory of all current accreditation procedures in the UN system over a three-year period. If the Member States, UN bodies and the NGO community work together effectively in the follow up to the M +5 Summit, the period required for this inventory could be significantly shorter and the desired standardisation achieved more swiftly.
A new accreditation process should be as apolitical and objective as possible.
Therefore it is crucial to carry out a fundamental discussion about the criteria required of NGOs for accreditation. A catalogue of criteria should be worked out together by
58 Cf. www.ngocongo.org
the NGO community and the United Nations. The UN Non-Governmental Liaison Office could take on an important coordinating function in this regard.
7. Many NGOs assess the opportunities for participation in the present reform process as lower than that of the major UN conferences of the 1990s (for example the 1992 Rio Conference on Sustainable Development or the World Women’s Conference in Beijing in 1995). This is due to the fact that only three NGO representatives are able to take part as speakers in the M +5 Summit in September 2005. Despite this well-founded criticism, the creation of a new – informal – opportunity for NGO
participation created by the NGO hearings at the General Assembly in June 2005 is to be welcomed.
8. The preparations for the first informal interactive hearings with non-state
organisations in the General Assembly on the 23rd and 24th of June 2005 have shown that the NGO community already has a good capacity for organisation (for example the Millennium +5 NGO Network). It is now the job of NGOs to strengthen these capabilities in the future to create a network of NGOs working in different areas. Such a network could combine specific as well as intersectoral interests allowing more effective representation at the global level.
9. The long-criticised dominance of Northern NGOs, finally gave way at the NGO hearings of the General Assembly in June 2005 to a more representative North-South participation. More than half of participating NGOs came from the South (178 out of 304 NGOs). The continuation of the contribution of Southern NGOs from developing countries can only be guaranteed if secure financing is made available. Therefore NGOs and Member States must ensure in the follow up process to the M +5 Summit that the proposals, outlined in the March 2005 reform report In Larger Freedom, for funds for the strengthening of participation by civil society organisations from the South and strengthening of the capacity of civil society organisations are followed up on.
10. A long-term demand of NGOs is the right of participation and address at formal plenary sessions of the UN General Assembly. Up until now, NGOs have had no formal legal status at the General Assembly, and are only invited to special
thematically limited special meetings. The current reform agenda does not present any changes to this status quo. However, inclusion of the informal NGO hearings in the annual meeting cycle of the General Assembly, which has been welcomed by Member States and NGOs, could lead to a medium term opening of the General Assembly for NGOs. A further step in this direction would be to hold the informal hearing during the annual plenary meeting, rather than three months previously.
11. At the NGO hearings of the General Meeting in June 2005, NGOs from different sectors and fields were present. In the case of an institutionalisation of the hearings, this meeting of participating NGOs should be used to create an intersectoral network, as a contribution towards the establishment of a global civil society.
12. The proposed institutional reform of the ECOSOC Human Rights Commission, which would transform it into a Human Rights Council of the General Assembly, represents an upgrading of Human Rights in the UN system. The United Nations already has a great deal of varied and positive experience in working together with
NGOs in this field. For their part, NGOs continuous and active work within the Human Rights Commission offers them major opportunities to exert influence. In the case of reform, the existing participation practices for NGOs, particularly the special procedures should be retained at all cost.
13. Plans for the probable establishment of a Peacebuilding Commission foresee no explicit contribution from NGOs to peacekeeping in post-conflict situations. However, NGOs should support the work of the commission, by sharing their local knowledge or their often considerable expert knowledge in the peacekeeping sector within the framework of formal participation. Building on the positive experiences within the framework of the Security Council and the GPPAC process, NGOs should be
officially – and not just informally – included in a Peacebuilding Commission. To this end, NGOs should seek to influence the modalities of the establishment of this
Commission through co-ordinated lobby work beginning directly after the M +5 Summit in September 2005. For their part, Member States should reconsider their reluctant stance and integrate those NGOs which are active in the relevant countries and possess expertise in the area of peacekeeping.
14. The role of the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) in the UN system should be strengthened so that it becomes the central platform for discussion of development and finance issues. The draft framework resolution of August 2005 of the M +5 Summit points in the right direction in this respect. Through the promotion of ECOSOC, NGO participation can be indirectly strengthened. The three main axes of the current political debate "Development, Human Rights and Security" should be institutionalised in the UN system through the new roles of ECOSOC, the Human Rights Council and the Peacebuilding Commission. In these three areas, NGOs currently have the most influence within the UN system, influence which they could extend correspondingly in the case of reform.
15. The semi-autonomous NGO liaison office (UN-NGLS) has done an excellent job over the last few years. It has worked efficiently and successfully above all in
facilitating the participation of more than 5,000 Southern NGOs at UN meetings in the last 12 years . Plans to integrate the UN-NGLS into the Secretariat were recently dropped. As a result, there is a danger that the work of this important and proven office will have to be discontinued due to lack of funding. In the follow up to the M +5 Summit, ensuring the continued existence of the UN-NGLS should have a high priority.